Correct, and a class that was not part of the provider
jar the bean itself came in.
Frank
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Prateek Asthana
> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2000 10:01 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Threads question
>
>
> Frank what can u explain what it means by
> >>"ThreadDelegate class is not deployed *with* the bean "
> What i have got is u are trying to say that its a plain java
> class and not an
> Session/Entity EJB class.Am i right ?
>
> Frank Sauer wrote:
>
> > I seem to remember that this can be done as long as the
> > ThreadDelegate class is not deployed *with* the bean. If
> > it's a class that 'just happens' to be on the server's
> > classpath, it's OK.
> >
> > Frank
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Laird Nelson
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2000 11:20 AM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Threads question
> > >
> > >
> > > An enterprise bean may not use thread primitives. I take
> this to mean
> > > it cannot do this:
> > >
> > > Thread t = new Thread(someRunnable);
> > > t.start();
> > >
> > > ...or this:
> > >
> > > synchronized (someGuard) {
> > > doCriticalWork();
> > > doMoreCriticalWork();
> > > }
> > >
> > > ...or this:
> > >
> > > Thread t = new Thread(someRunnable);
> > > t.start();
> > > t.join();
> > >
> > > ...but the specification seems to imply that it COULD do
> > > something like
> > > this--and I hope I can:
> > >
> > > ThreadDelegate td =
> > > new
> BasicJavaObjectThatUsesThreadsAndSynchronizationInternally();
> > > td.doWork(); // implementation works with threads
> > >
> > > Is this true? If for some reason it is NOT true, doesn't
> this mean I
> > > now have to know about implementation details of all the
> > > plain-Jane Java
> > > objects my enterprise bean might use? Wouldn't such a thing blow
> > > reusability out of the water?
> > >
> > > If it IS true, then why can't an enterprise bean use
> threads directly,
> > > as the invocation of td.doWork() in the example above
> occurs in the
> > > enterprise bean's caller's thread anyhow?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Laird
> > >
> > > ==============================================================
> > > =============
> > > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> > > include in the body
> > > of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help,
> > > send email to
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the
> message "help".
> > >
> >
> >
> ==============================================================
> =============
> > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> include in the body
> > of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help,
> send email to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
> ==============================================================
> =============
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> include in the body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help,
> send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
